ORDER

Swarup Kumar Mishra, Member (J):

Since issues involved in both the O.As. are interlinked and intertwined both the cases were heard analogously and for the sake of brevity this common order is passed.

O.A. 526/2015 The applicants, being aggrieved by the order dated 21/23.4.2015 under Annexure-A/6 in which their representation, claiming retrospective promotion to the grade of HSG-II and HSG-I as has been allowed to the applicants of OA Nos. 1196/2004 and 1211-1221 of 2004 (Annexure-A/3) has been rejected, have filed this O.A. inter alia praying for the following reliefs:

“(i) To admit the OA;

(ii) To quash the communication dtd. 21/23.04.2015 (Annex.A/6) holding same is illegal & discriminatory;

(iii) To direct the Respondent to extend the benefit of order dtd.

23.07.2008, passed in OA No. 1196/2004 (Annex.A/2) and decision dtd. 23.01.2015 (Annex.A/3);

(iv) To extend the all consequential benefits including promotion to the HSG-II & HSG-I respectively on completion of 8 years and 3 years thereafter from the date of initial promotion granted through TBOP/BCR;

(v) To pass any other order/orders as deem fit and proper for the ends of justice.”

It is the case of the applicant that on 17.12.1983 the scheme of granting the financial upgradation under TBOP and BCR was introduced by the Govt.

of India. On 24.12.1998 benefit of the scheme was extended to all the applicants promoting them to LSG on completion of 16 years of service. On 23.07.2008 O.A. No. 1196/2004 and other similar matters were filed by the similarly situated employees to that of applicants were disposed of by this Tribunal directing to extend the benefit of promotion to the said applicants.

The respondents carried the order of this Tribunal in O.A. 1196/2004 to the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa and the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 17.01.2012 upheld the order of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1196/2004. In compliance thereto, the competent authority implemented the order in respect of the applicants therein. The present applicants submitted representation dated 24.03.2015 stating inter alia that their cases being similar they ought not to have been discriminated while granting the benefits to other similarly situated persons who were applicants in the O.As. referred to above but the respondents without considering the cases of the applicants in its proper perspective with reference to the orders of this Tribunal which was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court rejected the representation on flimsy grounds which are not sustainable in the eyes of law. The order of rejection was communicated to them vide order dated 21/23.04.2015 which is impugned in this O.A.

OA 666/2015 In order to avoid reiteration of the facts, it would suffice to state that it is the case of the applicants in this O.A. that they being similarly situated to that of the applicants in whose favour benefits of HSG-II & HSG-I were allowed in compliance of the order of this Tribunal which was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa, the respondents would not have allowed the injustice caused to them in the decision making process of the matter to perpetuate by rejecting their representation under Annexure-A/6 (series) without due application of mind and without taking into consideration the order of this Tribunal affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Orissa. Hence, by filing this O.A., the applicants have prayed for the following relief:

“(i) To admit the OA;

(ii) To quash the communication dtd. 18.8.2015 & 9.9.2015 (Annex.A/6 series) holding same is illegal & discriminatory;

(iii) To direct the Respondent to extend the benefit of order dtd.

23.07.2008, passed in OA No. 1196/2004 (Annex.A/2) and decision dtd. 23.01.2015 (Annex.A/3);

(iv) To extend the all consequential benefits including promotion to the HSG-II & HSG-I respectively on completion of 8 years and 3 years thereafter from the date of initial promotion granted